What makes the Public Protector’s donation findings “fundamentally flawed”?

Question

Accepted Answer

Public Protector's Donation Findings Deemed Fundamentally Flawed by President Ramaphosa

President Cyril Ramaphosa has declared the Public Protector's findings concerning a donation to his 2017 campaign to be "fundamentally and irretrievably flawed" and is pursuing a judicial review. The Public Protector, Busisiwe Mkhwebane, had stated in a report that Ramaphosa "deliberately misled the National Assembly." Ramaphosa contends that the report contains significant factual inaccuracies and legal misinterpretations.
Allegations of Misleading Parliament

The Public Protector's report concluded that President Ramaphosa misled the National Assembly when responding to a parliamentary question in November. Ramaphosa had initially stated that a 500,000 rand payment was for consultancy work rendered by his son to Bosasa, now known as African Global Operations. He later corrected this statement, clarifying it was a donation towards his campaign for the leadership of the African National Congress party. Despite this correction and an apology for being misinformed, Mkhwebane maintained that Ramaphosa had indeed misled parliament by not possessing all the facts at the time of his initial response.
Ramaphosa's Counter-Arguments on Factual and Legal Deficiencies

President Ramaphosa has asserted that while the allegations are serious, the Public Protector's report is marred by "numerous factual inaccuracies of a material nature." He further elaborated that the findings are "wrong in law, are irrational and, in some instances, exceed the scope of the powers of the Public Protector." He believes that these deficiencies necessitate a determination by the courts to provide a final and impartial resolution to the matter.
Public Protector's Confidence in Findings

In response to the President's decision to seek legal recourse, the Public Protector's office expressed confidence in the integrity of its findings. A statement indicated that the findings are considered factual, based on a sound application of the law, and are expected to withstand a rationality test. The office maintained that the investigation was conducted independently and impartially, with powers exercised without fear, favour, or prejudice.
Call for Expedited Judicial Review

Ramaphosa has stressed the importance of an expedited review process to resolve the matter without leaving the country in uncertainty. He emphasized that his decision to approach the courts is not a judgment on the competence or motives of the Public Protector but rather a commitment to ensuring the correct and consistent application of the law. The President stated his intention to continue with his elected duties without being distracted by this issue.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What makes the Public Protector’s donation findings “fundamentally flawed”?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends